GeForce 310M vs Arc 8-Core iGPU

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc 8-Core iGPU and GeForce 310M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Arc 8-Core iGPU
2023
17.28
+5859%

Arc 8-Core iGPU outperforms 310M by a whopping 5859% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking3051324
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data1.53
ArchitectureXe LPG (2023)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameMeteor Lake iGPUGT218
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date14 December 2023 (1 year ago)10 January 2010 (15 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores816
Core clock speedno data606 MHz
Boost clock speed2300 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data260 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data14 Watt
Texture fill rateno data4.848
Floating-point processing powerno data0.04896 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data73
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeno dataDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno dataUp to 1 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno dataUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidthno data10.67 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectorsno dataDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power managementno data8.0

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12_211.1 (10_1)
Shader Modelno data4.1
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Arc 8-Core iGPU 17.28
+5859%
GeForce 310M 0.29

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Arc 8-Core iGPU 38877
+3362%
GeForce 310M 1123

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD360−1
1440p20-0−1
4K15-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 26
+333%
6−7
−333%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 26
+333%
6−7
−333%
Forza Horizon 4 71
+1083%
6−7
−1083%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50 0−1
Metro Exodus 40 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+975%
4−5
−975%
Valorant 75−80
+7400%
1−2
−7400%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 23
+283%
6−7
−283%
Dota 2 25 0−1
Far Cry 5 34
+386%
7−8
−386%
Fortnite 95−100
+9800%
1−2
−9800%
Forza Horizon 4 59
+883%
6−7
−883%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 25 0−1
Metro Exodus 29 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+2017%
6−7
−2017%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+975%
4−5
−975%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+1060%
5−6
−1060%
Valorant 75−80
+7400%
1−2
−7400%
World of Tanks 220−230
+1600%
12−14
−1600%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 21
+250%
6−7
−250%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+800%
7−8
−800%
Forza Horizon 4 46
+667%
6−7
−667%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+2017%
6−7
−2017%
Valorant 75−80
+7400%
1−2
−7400%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 11 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 11 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+8250%
2−3
−8250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18 0−1
World of Tanks 120−130
+6250%
2−3
−6250%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 45−50
+1125%
4−5
−1125%
Forza Horizon 4 30 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 27−30 0−1
Metro Exodus 40−45 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%
Valorant 45−50
+1075%
4−5
−1075%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11 0−1
Dota 2 9
−66.7%
14−16
+66.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
−66.7%
14−16
+66.7%
Metro Exodus 14−16 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+5400%
1−2
−5400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
−66.7%
14−16
+66.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 10−11 0−1
Far Cry 5 24−27 0−1
Fortnite 21−24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 15 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 14−16 0−1
Valorant 21−24 0−1

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc 8-Core iGPU is 8250% faster.
  • in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce 310M is 67% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc 8-Core iGPU is ahead in 20 tests (67%)
  • GeForce 310M is ahead in 3 tests (10%)
  • there's a draw in 7 tests (23%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.28 0.29
Recency 14 December 2023 10 January 2010
Chip lithography 5 nm 40 nm

Arc 8-Core iGPU has a 5858.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc 8-Core iGPU is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 310M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel Arc 8-Core iGPU
Arc 8-Core iGPU
NVIDIA GeForce 310M
GeForce 310M

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 54 votes

Rate Arc 8-Core iGPU on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 459 votes

Rate GeForce 310M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.